or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by SamSpade

They are better than fine - all of the above have lower unemployment and higher per capita exports than we do.
This is the fundamental issue. I personally find it infuriating that such intrusions in personal space (seriously, we're being told what to wear everywhere?? and a deviation instantly translates into judgement of character??) are not only accepted as normal, but also celebrated. I would not be surprised if he doesn't care about the money at all, it's just his little, sad, passive-agressive way to rebel. Better than just taking it up the ass, i suppose.Exhibit # 2,345,600...
We are a lot closer to fascism that most people are willing to admit. And the line about such people being "rare extremists" is ridiculous. 3 of them were ding pretty well in the GOP presidential primaries wor a while.
Government involvement is not about "return on investment" - its main advantage is that it is capable of productively utilizing economic surplus that would not be invested otherwise (precisly due to the lack of profitable outlets). And since surplus that cannot be profitably invested will eventually not be produced (by the private sector), that's the main reason why it is so essential for government to have a role in the economy - esp. during downturns.So yes, "money"...
Oh no... all those jokes about scientists... I was hoping that they were not true...
I wish this breathtaking S&T progrss slowed down a little - I mean, my new desktop computer has the exact same problems with crashing and unresponsiveness i had way back in the mid 1990s - almost 20 years ago. Can't stomach change that's so fast
The free market assumptions work great in Adam Smith's world - a pre-capitalist, pre-industrial world with no large scale production (and still only n theory - already during his time, it was clear that business monopolizes government and formulates policies to protect its own interests - not society's. That is the fundamental problem - to assume that the interests of large business and society overlap - they do not and cannot. So government control is already big deal -...
You are basically rehashng the ECON 101 abstract virtues of the free market . Arrow's whole point is that there are specific reasons, inherent in the nature of the good, that preclude the existence of an efficient market. Hence, the monstrosity we have now.Further, leaving the "markets alone" guarantees oligopoly and inefficiency in ANY market - take any random industry, and you will find that is is an oligopoly that extracts rents from the rest of society, rather than...
Look at the big picture:1) We have the most market-oriented health-care in the civilized world, yes?2) We have the highest per capita cost of health care, yes?3) We do not cover all of our population, yes?4) Our aggregate health outcomes are by any measure WORSE than those of western countries that both pay less and cover everybody.The idea that you have a "competivie" insurance market is a joke - about 5 copanies control 90% of the market AND healthinsurers are excempt...
That's irrelevant, let's hear a better argument. Here's the seminal Arrow Piece on healthcare:http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/82/2/PHCBP.pdfCommon sense is not always wrong, and economics is not always right, but in this case they overlap 100% do deliver a coldass takedown to armchair free marketeers.
New Posts  All Forums: